We use the Bitbucket as a web content repository and have enabled automatic merging for future release branches. This allows us to prepare content for articles that are targeted for publishing a few weeks out in an appropriate release branch, and have recent content automatically rolled forward. This works great for merging the main content, but there are certain files, such as pom.xml that we never want to auto-merge. This is because our future release release branches have an explicit version number and this file always creates a merge conflict.
On my local machine, I was able to manually perform the merge of my current branch into a future release branch as follows:
Created a .gitconfig file in the repo root with the following contents:
driver = true
Created a .gitattributes file in the repo root as follows:
However, when I create a pull request between my current branch and a future release branch, I get the error:
This pull request can't be merged.
You will need to resolve conflicts to be able to merge. More information.
This tells me the Bitbucket server is either not recognizing the .gitconfig or .gitattributes present in the repo root.
I don't have direct access to the Bitbucket server, so I was hoping I could accomplish the desired behavior by making repository specific config changes.
I did a bit of testing with my Bitbucket Server 5.5.0 instance and I was unable to replicate an issue.
Here are the steps I followed:
1. Define a merge driver by executing the following from my local machine:
git config --global merge.ours.driver true
2. Create a tets repo
3. Create a .gitattributes file with the following contents:
4. Git add and commit that file
5. While still on the master branch create an email.json and a pom.xml file
6. Git add and commit those files
7. Create 2 branches from master; json and xml
8. Make a change to the json file on the json branch and make a change to the xml file on the xml branch
9. Git add and commit those file changes
10. Go back to the master branch and push everything to the remote repo/Bitbucket Server
In the UI, here is what I see:
The changes for each file are seen when compared to master
However when I attempt to create a Pull Request, I see the following for both branches:
Since the only changes were applied to 2 files that are preserved via the merge driver we defined, Bitbucket Server sees the branches as up to date with master.
Please note that no changes were made on the server, only on the client side as mentioned above.
I hope this information is helpful!
Developer Tools Support
You are absolutely correct and I apologize for for that oversight.
When I create a PR from xml to master the pom.xml file is not preserved and the merge is successful:
I am seeing the same behavior when I merge the branch locally as well:
git merge xml
10:17:03.744722 git.c:344 trace: built-in: git 'merge' 'xml'
10:17:03.751833 run-command.c:626 trace: run_command: 'gc' '--auto'
10:17:03.754529 git.c:344 trace: built-in: git 'gc' '--auto'
pom.xml | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
10:17:03.824365 git.c:344 trace: built-in: git 'symbolic-ref' '-q' 'HEAD'
As I am unable to replicate what you have described, please provide the following so we can investigate a bit further:
1. Your version of Bitbucket Server
2. The exact steps you are taking on the command line
3. The exact steps you are taking in the Bitbucket Server UI
I've created a public repo and put together a readme with the exact steps used here:
Internally, we use Bitbucket Server v5.5.0, but I see the same behavior on Bitbucket Cloud.
The way we would like this to work is that when pull request of a fix into release/1.1 is merged, the fix should cascade to any future release branches such as release/1.2 (based on semantic versioning). Since we expect that a merge conflict will happen on the pom.xml file due to necessary updating of the version number, we want to prevent the merge conflict and just accept the existing pom.xml file as is.
Bitbucket Pipelines helps me manage and automate a number of serverless deployments to AWS Lambda and this is how I do it. I'm building Node.js Lambda functions using node-lambda ...
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!Find a group
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!
Unfortunately there are no AUG chapters near you at the moment.Start an AUG
We're bringing product updates and pro tips on teamwork to ten cities around the world.Save your spot